This dearth of information indicated that there hadn’t been much study on the negative impacts of religious practices and beliefs. And when I began asking people about it, I learned that talking about the subject often made people uncomfortable and sometimes defensive.

But it’s important that we do talk about RCM, because it’s the first step to protecting children. And faith communities are also served by learning about RCM, especially when you consider that many churches, synagogues, and mosques are struggling to attract families. As Dr. Donald Capps of Princeton University Seminary said:

This is not a pleasant subject, especially for those of us who have deep personal attachments to the Christian faith. But we dare not avoid the subject, for the abuse of children in the name of religion may well be the most significant reason for why they leave the faith when they are old enough to do so. We must ask ourselves: Who can blame them? Why should they not abandon the scene of their silent torment?

What is religious child maltreatment? It is child abuse or neglect that is enabled by religious beliefs held by perpetrators, victims, and the surrounding community. Examples include using religious messages to terrorize children, refusing to report sexual abuse perpetrated by religious leaders, denying children needed medical care due to beliefs about “faith healing,” and beating children based on particular scriptural interpretations.

RCM is not new. There are plenty of examples in the Old Testament. But what is a recent phenomenon is our recognition that adults can abuse or neglect children in the midst of adhering to religious doctrines. Marci A. Hamilton, CEO and Academic Director of CHILD USA, writes in God vs. the Gavel:

The United States has a romantic attitude toward religious individuals and institutions, as though they are always doing what is right. The unrealistic belief that religion is always for the good . . . is a hazardous myth. . . . Horrible things have been done to children beneath the cloak of religion. Children have been raped, beaten, and permitted to die excruciating deaths.

As high-profile crimes against children have taken place in small and large religious organizations, more and more people are asking whether certain kinds of religious belief should be considered a risk factor of child abuse and neglect.

When are children most at risk? According to my research, the most vulnerable children are those who are raised in religious authoritarian cultures. That is, cultures in which members adhere to a strict social hierarchy, are unusually fearful, and are socially separatist.

Raising awareness of the issue of religious child maltreatment and its risk factors is the first step toward protecting children. And that’s something we all should strive to do, regardless of whether we belong to a religious community or have no religious beliefs.

1 Comment on "What is Religious Child Maltreatment?"

Doctors, as well as religious figures, are responsible for massive child abuse. Partial penile amputation of an innocent newborn American male tortures the victim, mutilates the victim, and psychologically damages him for life. Doctors who are victims seem to have a compulsion to perform circumcisions on as many innocents as they can. They cannot stand the idea that someone else might go through life intact, and able to enjoy his sexual life to the fullest. Those who recognize the great harm that is done must organize and outlaw this procedure. It is a relatively simple and inexpensive solution to a massive human rights abuse!

Some people lose their parents to cancer or car accidents or other things. I've lost my parents to a cult.

—Lauren Drain, daughter excommunicated from her family and her church

Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself. They come through you but not from you, and though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

—Kahlil Gibran

We never really tell kids what [church] services are all about. All they're told is to be quiet and not talk for an hour. . . . There's the plight of the four-year-old who was in church on Sunday when the wine and wafers were passed out. His mother leaned over and told him that he was not old enough to comprehend the transubstantiation and that he was not allowed to partake in the Communion. Later, the collection plate came by and stopped dead in front of him. His mother again leaned over and tried to coax the nickel out of his clenched fist. He held firm and shouted, “If I can't eat, I won't pay.”

—Erma Bombeck

[W]e must acknowledge that our religious communities have not fully upheld their
obligations to protect our children from violence. Through omission, denial and silence,
we have at times tolerated, perpetuated and ignored the reality of violence against
children in homes, families, institutions and communities, and not actively confronted
the suffering that this violence causes. Even as we have not fully lived up to our
responsibilities in this regard, we believe that religious communities must be part
of the solution to eradicating violence against children, and we commit ourselves
to take leadership in our religious communities and the broader society.

I do not wear clerical garb at all, because I see clericalism as one of the most prominent and important causes for this entire problem—the attitude that the clergy are somehow removed and above other Catholics and that we have to be protected at all costs.